We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Lie about genocide and then collect your Pulitzer Prize The whole issue of Walter Duranty’s Pulitzer Prize in 1932 has always pissed me off. It just rankles that he got away with it, so the least we can do is blacken the bastard’s name posthumously for the sake of the millions of dead Ukrainians he lied about.
Now that Harold Pinter has won a Nobel Prize for literature, I guess the tradition of lionising men of letters who are apologists for mass murdering leftists is still alive and well.
Want to make your voice heard on the issue of Walter Duranty’s Pulitzer Prize? Take a look at Cyber Cossack (and check out their great site banner) and if you are in the NY area, consider lending your hand to a bit of activism.
Better late than never.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
While we’re at it let’s not forget that running bitch of the blindfolded left Beatrice Webb…
Then we might as well drop her husband Sidney and that dolt Geroge Bernard Shaw in the same bag. (London School of Economics and The Fabian Society.)
Bravo to anyone trying to get this corrected! The New York Times owes the world a great number of apologies, but refusing to set the record straight on this in print is certainly its greatest misdeed.
However – I can’t get excitied about the linked blog CyberCossack when I see posts like this one on legal prostitution. If Canada wishes to legalize prostitution – good for them. The slave trade has been flourishing in Ontario recently – legalizing prostitution would probably go a long way toward controling this practice.
The article they link as “evidence” that legalization doesn’t work is a study in bias. No mention is made, for example, of the success of legal prostitution in Nevada, where there is a trade organization and working benefits for prostitutes.
Most importantly – laws off people’s bodies! Slavery can safely remain illegal while we extend control over the body back to the original owners, thank you. The principled difference is quite clear.
The blog in question also seems to be a bit of a Ukranian nationalist thing – which I am allergic to at the moment for linguistic reasons. I’m tired of being told to call that country “Ukraine” rather than “The Ukraine” despite the fact that up until last year or so “The Ukraine” was pretty much standard. The argument that the Russians invented this to put them in their place is silly (and anyway demonstrably false).
But fine – this is just a personal allergy. The main point of the post – that Walter Durranty was a monster and that the NYTimes should return his prize – is right on point.
The banner you liked so much, Perry, is photoshopped painting “Zaporozhie cossaks are writing a letter to the Turkish Sultan”.
May be the reason credits to original painter aren’t given is that Ilya Repin was an ethnic Russian?
In any case, if originality in interpretation counts, I’d much prefer this version.
Otherwise, the issue of letting the truth out about Holodomor in Ukraine is very worthy. It’s just a bit strange, to me, to try to separate ethnic Ukrainians as a target for deliberate genocide; if there is an area where Lenin and Stalin were “equal opportunity destryers”, is mass murder of people of all nationalities of former SU. Not one ethnicity can say they were spared; in Ukraine or elswhere.
what would you expect from the Nobels???
Carter?????
UN???
Trimble?
ARAFAT???
Gyatso?? (Dalai Lama)
UN Peacekeepers in 1988????
Those international anti-nuclear doctor wankers??
Lê Duc Tho??? and Kissinger???
Of course that is the peace committee, but still…, gives you an idea. Where is Reagan? When will Sharon get his??
Many thanks to Samizdata visitors for the comments however please note that the Cossack Sich consists of several free spirit writers –but do consider that the quantum increase in prostitution will necessarily increase the depraved problems represented by the Natasha syndrome.
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:BdJ8zBFws-AJ:www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1559707356%3Fv%3Dglance+natasha+sex+trade&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
Regarding the Equal Opportunity Genocide Policy of Stalin, Lenin and Trotsky, it ain’t so. The 1921 Famine found a relenting Lenin allowing international relief into Russia but not Ukraine. The 1932 Famine ended precisely at the border.
http://www.faminegenocide.com/resources/famine_map.html
Did we mention the dopuble secret 1947 Famine?
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:Rj3bNrOtnLcJ:www.ukrweekly.com/Archive/2003/460321.shtml++Roman+Serbyn+and+%22The+1946-1947+Famine+in+Ukraine&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
Finally, there is good documentation that those famine areas in the Russia were largely inhabited by Ukrainians as well as other targeted groups including ethnic Germans (this did wonders to embolden Nazis in 1932) and Cossacks.
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:d4Jwyvix_MIJ:www.faminegenocide.com/resources/ukraine_famine.html+famine+genocide+caucuses+%22ethnic+ukrainians%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
http://colley.co.uk/garethjones/soviet_articles/holodomor_letters.htm
And lets not forget that the Russians threw Ukrainians and Poles into the breach against the Nazis – actual Russian losses were a few per cent whereas the latter approximated 14 % of population.
But we rejoice in Ukraine (there are no “the” articles in slavic languages) as this issue is being discussed despite Durantyism. We might disagree but we fight for your right to say it.
Irrelevant!!! “The Ukraine” is the name of the country in English. Like every other language in the whole world, English reserves the right to use names according to its own conventions. It’s rather the same reason we call Moscow “Moscow,” even though its name in Russian is “Moskva.” (For their part, the Russians call the USA something like “ssha,” after the acronym in Cyrillic, and I have never objected. It is, after all, their language, and is entitled to its own conventions.)
So – call The Ukraine what you will in Ukranian – it’s name in English is “The Ukraine.
*SNEEZE!*
Oh and by the way – Bulgarian is a slavic language and has definite articles. Do your homework before making public generalizations, please!
Before anyone has the oppotunity to do it to me – I just wanted to be pedantic to myself. Of course in the above post I mean to say that Bulgarian has “a” definite article, since there is, of course, only the one.
The only reason prostitution is a ‘problem’ is that it is illegal. If a woman sex worker has no fear of the law, anyone abusing her could be dealt with like any other abusive person. It is the fact what she does is illegal that give the people who prey on prostitutes their hold over them.
Joshua, these days Ukraine (no “the”) is generally accepted as the official name of the country.
“… the historical name “Ukraine” was given back to the country after it declared its independence in 1991. On June 28, 1996, this official name was corroborated into the Constitution of Ukraine.” More at http://www.ukraineinfo.us/about/aboutukr.html“)
The US government has dropped the “the” in Ukraine (see govthttp://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/up.html) as have other governments as well as most reputable western publications.
However, since the Ukrainian constitution is in the Ukrainian language, which does not have the article “the,” there is no absolute authority to resolve arguments about using “the” in its country’s name in English. By all means, call it “The Ukraine” if it makes you feel better. You certainly won’t be alone (just out of date).
So, calm down and go read a good book. I recommend “The Natashas: The New Global Sex Trade” by Victor Malarek. Or anything by Robert Conquest.
The politically correct usage without the definite article employed by many western media outlets may well become standard. I will not be among those contributing to this change. For similar reasons, I intend to continue calling “The Sea of Japan” by that name whether or not the Koreans want it called “The East Sea.” Also, a certain city in southern Korea is still “Pusan” and not “Busan,” as the Korean (South) government would have it.
In fact, Scythian Princess is giving a skewed version of this. It is the Ukranian government that has asked for these changes (they have made an equally ridiculous request of the Russians – Russian uses a different preposition when talking about the Ukraine – and the Russians told them to get stuffed, which is rather what we would have done were we not already deeply mired in politically correct syndrome). I don’t know whether Ukrainians consider their government to have final authority over their language; I certainly don’t consider that to be the case for English for any government. The US Government’s opinion is about the last one I consider when deciding how to speak.
It’s “the Ukraine.”
Fine Joshua, suit yourself. If I ever hear someone talking about “the Ukraine” on the streets of Constantinople or Peking some day, I’ll know it’s you.
In the meantime, I hope you’ll join the protest against the New York Times which continues to stand by a consummate liar who, while on its payroll, denied the starvation-by-death of 7-10 million Ukrainians in 1932-33 by Stalin’s communist regime in the then-Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic .
Oops, I meant death-by-starvation. Pardon my dyslexia.
Absolutely. It is a completely worthy cause.
Joshua, re NYT greatest misdeed: I think this comes fairly close as well.
Alisa-
Point taken, and thanks for that link. Obviously the NYTimes has a lot to answer for.
It’s interesting (but ultimately pointless) to argue about which of these is worse. In favor of the Holocaust case, one could obviously argue that the paper as an entity seems to be responsible – whereas in the Ukrainian case it might be more Duranty personally.
On the other hand, I guess the NYTimes at least has the option of returning Duranty’s prize in the Ukrainian case and setting the record straight – something they have repeatedly refused to do.
I don’t know.
One thing that bugs me about the earlier comment by blackminorcapullets, for example, is the implied insistence that we regard Ukrainians as special victims – rejecting the idea that Russian victims of Stalin were equal in their victimhood status. I find this kind of “corpse calculus” monstrous. If there were Russian victims of Stalin, then they were victims too. The fact of their being Russian doesn’t lessen the fact that their lives were unjustly destroyed. (But then, this kind of chauvinistic attitude from Ukrainian nationalists in general – about a wide variety of topics – is why I have developed an allergy to that country… )
Which is a long-winded way of saying I’m starting to regret having tried to qualify the NYTimes’ misdeeds – especially in light of the fact, as you point out, that they covered up the sufferings of other peoples as well. It’s an outrage that they keep the prize and refuse to set the record straight – period.
Joshua: yes, yes, and yes. I was simply trying to show that when they call it “the newspaper of record”, it is not the real record they are refering to. Their movie reviews are very good, though:-|